LMS Course
Sep 14th, 2010 by naomi
Working with Moodle-System functionality versus Educational requirements
Working with Moodle over the past few months has been an adventure in of itself. At times, it felt like I was climbing a mountain. While it was not difficult to learn Moodle’s basic features, it has been a challenge to balance the educational requirements of EAL education, with Moodle’s functionality. I have learned compromise is the key word when working with Moodle.
I began climbing this mountain with the intent to create reading, writing, listening and speaking activities for each unit, as these are the four strands taught in language instruction. After figuring out how programs like Nanogong, Wimba classroom and DimDim worked, and conferring with classmates, I discovered that it would not be possible to install any of these programs and use them for this course. I could only do this if I was using an independent Moodle server. I decided to abandon including a speaking component in this course, for now, but kept it in the course description in the hopes that I would be able to add a speaking component at some point in the future. This was first, but not last compromise I had to make.
The next challenge was to create a splash page. First, I had to figure out what a splash page was. That part of the climb was interesting, as it took me, some classmates, and the instructor to figure out Moodle used different terminology for the concept than WebCT or other programs. I felt like I wasted a few days trying to figure that out. Then came the “fun” of designing it. While I found it easy to play with text colours, inserting images, and creating links, it was difficult to work with tables. I needed to use a table to create a Splash page. Tables are important in page design because they make it easier to create a clean, easy to use interface. Simple interfaces are important for EAL students, because they do not have the reading ability to work with a cluttered interface. As I have learned, ease of use is an important criterion to judge suitability. (Bates and Poole; 2003) The problem with tables is that in Moodle, I did not have the ability to manipulate individual cells. I could only manipulate the size of columns, or rows. Then, half the time when I merged cells, the row would shift. This made it difficult to align pictures and text in an easy to follow manner. After some time and experimentation, I was able to create a table that lent itself to a workable user interface. I thought my troubles were over until I tried to create links between units. I discovered anchors and links only work within the same unit, not between units, so it is impossible to easily navigate between units. I had to settle on the splash page links going to the first html page of a unit, rather than the unit index.
In terms of planning the route I would take, I initially decided on a path that would allow for a high degree of interaction with classmates and content, as interaction is critical for all forms of learning, especially in EAL (ISTE; 2008 ) (Chickering and Gamson; 1987) (Anderson; 2008). But as I became more familiar with Moodle, I discovered the potential to create collaborative assignments is limited. While there are wiki, discussion forums and chat room features, there is not a whiteboard feature with the chat room, or Etherpad-like programs to allow for synchronous communication and collaboration. I would need to rely on external programs, and social media (eg PiratePad, Voicethreadz, Audacity, and Elluminate) to encourage the type of interaction desired. It is possible to create these activities in Moodle and then have students go to these websites, download the software, and then begin to work. However, when I consider my target students’ capabilities, there are not many of them who would feel comfortable or be skilled enough to do this. Therefore, I chose not to include these aspects in my course.
Another area of compromise in this course, was with formatting. Formatting needs to be easy to follow. With this in mind, I originally chose the collapsed topics format, but as time went on, and I added unit summaries and other details, the main page became too long and difficult for students to follow. I tested all of the other formats available and unfortunately, each format presented problems. Finally, I decided on the weekly tab format, as it cleanly separated each unit, making it easier for students to follow. The biggest problem was that it automatically assigned dates to each unit, which I could not override. I ended up writing revised dates under the ones posted, and created an announcement in the news forum. A tabbed topic format would have met my requirements, but none was available.
Moodle is missing another feature that is important in language instruction. There is not an online editing feature to correct students’ writing, or grammar as they work. This impacts my ability to give immediate feedback in a way that is useful to students (Gibbs and Simpson; 2005). To clarify, in the classroom when students speak or write, I immediately spot errors, give feedback and have students reproduce the work error –free. My ability to do this in Moodle is severely limited as most forms of communication are based on a submit- and-review basis. The best I can do is add comments, (which students often do not read or apply to their learning (Gibbs and Simpson; 2005)), or create quizzes. While quizzes provide immediate feedback, they fall more in the range of guided learning activities, not language activation activities or learning opportunities. Therefore, they are of limited use in producing long-term learning (Gibbs and Simpson; 2005).
Creating web pages often felt like climbing a cliff face, a really big challenge. In the past, I created websites on Yahoo and Pbworks. These were simple to create and required minimal knowledge of html code. Using Nvu with Moodle was a different story. Initially, I had difficulties uploading pages with graphics. I often had to of upload and unzip files several times for the graphics to upload in web pages. Then I ran into difficulties editing pages. I thought I had carefully planned the course and what I wanted each page to cover. But, when I discovered a mistake, or realized I had programmed activities differently from the way I described them in the web page, the edit web page feature in Moodle did not work. I felt like I was left dangling and had to move back to a more secure position, meaning I had to delete all of the pages, images and zip files, clear the internet cache, then edit the pages, rezip the files and upload them again. This process was very time consuming and tripled the time it took to create a semi-interactive course. Then, I felt like I slid several feet down the mountain in free-fall while testing the program, as the pages did not open properly in Internet Explorer. It was only through the help of classmates and instructor, that a) I realized what the problem was, B) that it was common, and c) that as long as web pages worked in Firefox, I would be okay in this course, although, d) in the future I will need to learn a lot more about CSS code to fix it. Then, I had issues with links in Moodle. One day all of my links to pictures, and audio files worked, the next day they did not and I had to reset them. I spent a fair amount of time in this course holding my breath, praying for things to keep working. In short, there were times when I was working with web pages and links that I felt like I would lose my grip and fall all the way down the mountain.
When I felt like I had a handle on creating web pages and links, I moved on to higher heights, only to have to seek out alternate paths and comprise yet again. One area where I had to compromise functionality with requirements was in regards to gradebooks. There are many grading methods in Moodle. For one thing, all of the activities appear in the gradebook, not just the ones that count for grades, which makes it hard to follow. Additionally, when I wish to change the total marks an assignment is worth, I have to go through a roundabout process. I exit the gradebook, go back to the assignment, edit the assignment, then go back to the gradebook to ensure all the changes I made stuck. It is not possible to create just a blank section, say for participation and then allocate a grade manually,. Every assignment has to be given a grade. When I put in some rubric-based assignments, I either had to give them a mark for each rubric section, or switch to a grading scheme that allowed the use of scales, but no assignments of grades. So rather than having a section of the gradebook for manual input of grades, I had to compromise, and use the scales, with no grade allocation, and assign those grades to other assignments to continue my climb up the mountain.
As I approached the mountain’s summit, there was one major hurdle I had to cover- that was the issue of selective release. Unlike LMSs like WebCT, Moodle does not have a selective release feature, so I had to make a choice between several options. The first was to make assignments, lessons, quizzes, discussions all time sensitive, so access to these activities would be limited within a specific time frame. I decided to do this, as it would force students to stay continuously engaged, and not just log on once or twice in the course. This was critical to the course, as continuous regular participation in the many forums is necessary to get the most out of this course. However, this only worked for select activities, and did not include the web pages I designed to relay content. In order to selectively release a unit in its entirety, one has to use the hide feature – a form of manual selective release. You hide the topic when you do not want students to see it, and make it visible when you do. I chose to use this option in addition to the timed release. So while I do not have an automatic release where everything will appear in the sequence I desire, I can arrange for this to happen manually by unit and automatically within the unit.
Finally, I reached the mountain peak and just felt like breathing a sigh of relief. I was done. My course may not be perfect, and not entirely what I desired, but it was functional. I decided to sit awhile and reflect about what I had learned from this experience and whether I would recommend it industry wide.
While I have learned a lot about course design climbing this mountain, I feel like the functionality of Moodle and the requirements I need for successful EAL instruction, do not work together . I am uncertain about implementing its use across an institution. It would take a lot of time and money to set up and build instructors’ familiarity with the program. It also does not easily accommodate interactive activities, and in some ways encourages passive learning through its reliance on text-based media (Siemens; 2003). Instructors do not have the ability to provide immediate feedback the way they would in the classroom. Using Moodle, would require instructors to transform how and what they teach (Janson and Janson; 2009). Very few EAL institutions have the funds, or wiling staff capable of supporting this process.
Going forward, I feel I need to spend more time, learning the advanced features of Moodle and investigating add-ons, so I can achieve the functionality I desire. I would also like to take the time to explore the workshop feature. I was reluctant to try it, as I felt I would need more time than I had to figure it out, from the reviews I have read. There are also other features I wish to explore, such as journals, grading scales, LAMS and SCROM activities. I also need to become more proficient at CSS. Overall, what I think I have learned is that using learning management systems and creating html pages from scratch is nowhere as easy as I had thought and that it takes a great deal of planning before a person can even begin designing a comprehensive online course, not to mention the modification of plans that occurs during the design process. While I learned a lot climbing this mountain, I am glad this part of my journey is over.
- Chickering, A.W. & Gamson, Z.F. (1987). Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education. American Association for Higher Education Bulletin, 39 (7), 3-7. Accessed online 11 Mar 2009 http://www.aahea.org/bulletins/articles/sevenprinciples1987.htmBates A. W. & Poole, G. (2003). A Framework for Selecting and Using Technology. In A.W. Bates & G. Poole, Effective Teaching with Technology in Higher Education (pp. 75-108). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 4.
- National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers http://www.iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/NETS/ForTeachers/2008Standards/NETS_for_Teachers_2008.htm
- Anderson, T. (2008). Towards a Theory of Online Learning. In: T. Anderson & F. Elloumi (Eds.), Theory and Practice of Online Learning. Edmonton AB: Athabasca University. Accessed online 3 March 2009 http://www.aupress.ca/books/120146/ebook/02_Anderson_2008_Anderson-Online_Learning.pdf
- Gibbs, G. & Simpson, C. (2005). Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1(1), 3-31. Accessed online 11 March 2009. http://www.open.ac.uk/fast/pdfs/Gibbs%20and%20Simpson%202004-05.pdf
- Siemens, G. (2003). Evaluating Media Characteristics: Using multimedia to achieve learning outcomes. Elearnspace. Accessed online 11 October 2005. http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/mediacharacteristics.htm
- Janson, A. & Janson, R. (2009). Integrating Digital Learning Objects in the Classroom: A Need for Educational Leadership. Innovate, 5(3). Accessed online 15 February 2009 http://innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=581&action=article.